Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- ----S. 115--Suit for possession--Dismissed--Appeal--Accepted--Case was remanded--Civil revision--Accepted--Case was remanded to trial Court--Appeal was partly accepted--Entitlement of possession--Consistency between findings--Challenge to--Petitioners-defendants could not bring on record any cogent evidence with regards to fact that Syed Qutub Ali Shah sold out his share of property to lessees, as no sale deed with regards to above said fact was brought on record and only contents of Ex.D2 were referred by learned counsel for petitioners, which were not sufficient to prove factum of selling out of property owned by Sycd Qutub Ali Shah--Apart from this, petitioners, though produced a letter written by a person from India that Syed Qutub Ali Shah had also sold his share, but said letter could not be relied upon as it was not a sufficient proof that share of Syed Qutub Ali Shah was purchased by Hindus before partition and same was later on declared as evacuee property--Appellate Court and by evaluating evidence on record in a minute manner learned appellate Court has rightly adjudged lis in hand and has rightly held respondents entitled to have possession of one kanal and 15 marlas of disputed land--It is settled proposition of law that in case of inconsistency between findings learned trial Court and learned Appellate Court, findings of latter must be given preference in absence of any cogent reason to contrary--There appears no illegality and irregularity as well as wrong exercise of vested jurisdiction allegedly to have been committed by learned appellate Court while passing impugned and decree warranting interference by this Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction--Civil revision was dismissed. PLJ 1975 Lahore 298, 1993 SCMR 21, 2015 SCMR 1, 2013 SCMR 1300 and 1969 SC 617 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: SHAHID BILAL HASSAN, JUSTICE---.--- Succinctly, the respondents-plaintiffs instituted a suit for possession against the present petitioners wherein it was maintained that they were owners of the property as mentioned in the head note of the plaint and they were entitled to get its possession. As per averment of the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492